false lite spd Rev. June 4, 2011 AD
Ukrainian translation by Anna Matesh Polish translation by
Radiation Sys.> Force Interactions > Lite Spd vs SR > False Lite Spd >
Double Force Paradox > Grav. Constants > Grav. Links > Review Letters >
Abstract This is a
public domain article.
The constant light speed tenet,...the complete foundation of Special Relativity, is shown to be falsified by the following two facts:
The paper Light
Speed versus Special Relativity presents Olaf Roemer's 1676 AD Jupiter / Io data that
demonstrates that light speed is --"not"-- constant in relation to all
observers regardless of their motion in relation to the source.
Copy and Typo Corrections 5/17/2011
As claimed by Einstein the constant light speed hypothesis is only valid when observer and source are within a non-accelerating reference frame. The phrase “non accelerating reference frame” describes two possible scenarios:
For the Mutual Acceleration scenario: The constant light speed assumption is
falsified by the fact that light speed is finite. Basic logic dictates that
light speed would have to be “infinite” in order for it to remain constant
for an observer, whether in motion or at rest, in relation to the source.
Ref. the “Light Speed versus Special Relativity” paper above. Roemer’s 1676 light speed data provides a “finite” speed of approximately 186 k miles / sec.
Regarding the Universal Acceleration scenario: The constant light speed assumption is falsified by the fact that there is no place available in our physical Universe where some form of accelerating force, gravitational or orbital, does not exist for matter in relation to inertial space. Furthermore, if such a "fictitious" inertial frame did exist the light speed would still have to be infinite in order to appear constant for an observer in motion in relation to the source.
The known types of acceleration existing within the Universe are:
Therefore the following chain of logic arises:
The complete foundation of SR and GR is based on this un-testable constant
light speed hypothesis and its ad hoc qualification;
i.e.-- that the assumption is only applicable in a non accelerating reference space, where no one can look.
Regarding the Mutual Acceleration scenario above, there are three sets of data falsifying the constant light speed hypothesis within the inertial space of our Universe,-- provided in the "Light Speed versus Special Relativity" paper;
The arithmetic of addition and subtraction and basic logic sufficient to judge a foot race are the only tools that are required to falsify the constant light speed hypothesis using the above data sets.
I confidently predict that not one set of data exists and a set cannot be produced for testing and proving the constant light speed hypothesis within:
It is well established and logical that un-testable assumptions, hypothesis and proclamations cannot be used as factual foundations for useable theories or laws in the rational studies and applications of physical science.
All contrary arguments "with data" claiming to demonstrate the infinite speed of light and/or the constant light speed hypothesis are requested and welcomed and will be promptly addressed with interest.
In regard to the above message, "Falsification of the Constant Light Speed Assumption", the argument has been raised that the paper falsifies SR but does not falsify GR.
The following two quotes support the view that General Relativity is directly dependent on Special Relativity, and therefore is also falsified.
This first quote is from "Understanding Relativity", Sartori, University of California Press, page 275, Copyright 1996 AD
Quote: The Geometry of Space-Time:
".......We already know from special relativity that space and time are intermixed; a space coordinate in one frame of reference corresponds to a combination of space and time coordinates in another reference frame. Curvature therefore cannot be confined to spatial dimensions. It is not three-dimensional space but rather four-dimensional space-time that is curved according to general relativity." Unquote
This indicates that the General Relative theory requires the existence of curved space-time...and space-time is a product of Special Relativity. Therefore when SR is falsified, General Relativity stands falsified.
This second following quote is from a letter Einstein sent to Erwin Finley-Freundlich dated August 1913.
Quote:"If the velocity of light is only a tiny bit dependent on the velocity of the light source, then my whole theory of Relativity and Gravitation is false". Unquote
This quote from Einstein provides independent evidence supporting the fact that General Relativity is dependent on the false constant light speed assumption and the falsified Special Relativity.
Therefore; ...the falsification of Special Relativity automatically falsifies General Relativity, per the above quotes by the following authorities:
Dr. Albert Einstein, Author of the General Relativity Theory
Dr. Leo Sartori, Professor, University of Nebraska
Editors, University of California Press, circa 1996
Calculation of the Double Force Paradox, which is independent of the above constant light speed issue, falsifies all mass attraction concepts, including General Relativity, as viable causes of gravitation.
It is notable that Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton and Olaf Roemer provided all of the facts and data required to support this message by the late 1600's. For more than two hundred years prior to the 1905 constant light speed assumption and more than three hundred years prior to the current decade, 2010,---this information has been in the public domain and is readily available on the internet.
The content of this web page authored by me, Stanley Byers, is granted to be in the public domain. ***
http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/roemlitexls.htm#Astronomy On Line Data